The popularity of golf has lead to the development of many accessory items useful in playing the game. One accessory item particularly useful on courses including water hazards is the golf ball retriever. For those familiar with the game a description of this device is not needed, for the uninitiated, however, a golf ball retriever is a device for retrieving a golf ball which has strayed from its intended course to the bottom of a water hazard.
Prior art devices used for retrieving golf balls typically include an elongated, telescoping handle which in a retracted position is conveniently stored within the golfer's golf bag. At the end of the handle a cuplike member that typically pivots is used for engaging and securing the golf ball. Once the golf ball is safely within the confines of the cup-like member, the user withdraws the retriever from the hazard and secures the ball.
Use of the prior art golf ball retrievers has always been a tricky business. It is often difficult to secure the ball within the cup-like member at the end of the handle. In maneuvering the retriever it often contacts the bottom of the hazard and the water becomes so muddy that the ball is temporarily lost from sight. In a fast moving stream where the current rapidly clears the water, the user can often secure the ball on subsequent efforts. In a stagnant pond or slow moving stream, however, the muddy condition can last far longer than the average golfer will devote for golf ball retriving.
Attempts have been made to reduce the difficulty of retrieving a submerged golf ball. Prior art U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,669,427 to Curtis, 2,834,629 to Williams, and 4,013,295 to Baughman disclose apparatus for capturing a submerged ball within the confines of a pivoting arm rather than a cup-like member. Each of these patents discloses a resilient biasing member which in one position biases the arms in an open condition and in response to contact with a golf ball, biases the arms into a closed position.
Applicant knows of no commercialization of the devices embodied in these patents and for this reason believes that a problem may exist in the trigger mechanism of these devices. They depend for their operation on a rather precise equilibrium position of the pivoting point of the capturing arms. Stated another way, the devices employ two equilibrium positions, one where the spring biases the arms in an open position, and a second where the spring biases the arms closed to capture a submerged golf ball. This condition may result in uneven or uncontrolled opening and closing of the arms at inopprotune times during the retrieval process. Since the user's own state of equilibrium is often in doubt due to an uneven stream bank, or the necessity to closely approach the shore, the structure of these patents may have resulted in inopportune and unintended opening and closing.